The performance and rationale of European ethical funds : an ethical perspective

This dissertation examines whether ethical investment funds are good investments in comparison with other stock market investments for individual investors. Firstly, the financial performance of ethical funds was analysed using traditional risk adjusted performance measures. Performance was first compared with market benchmarks and then in comparison with other funds using a 'matched pair' approach (Luther, Matatko and Corner 1992; Mallin, Saadouni and Briston, 1995; Gregory, Matatko and Luther, 1997). This analysis indicated that the financial performance of ethical funds was not significantly different from market benchmarks and other funds. It was therefore concluded that ethical funds were good investments financially. A second empirical study used field research to examine the policies and processes of ethical funds. Two complementary strategies for dealing with ethical issues were identified; screening and engagement. Screening involves the use of exclusionary and/or positive ethical criteria in the stock selection process. This study indicated that ethical funds had a number of processes in place to address ethical issues. These processes included ethical screening; ethical advisory committees; specialist ethical researchers and use of other organisations. In terms of the policies and processes employed by ethical funds they were "good" investments compared to other funds. This confirms previous findings that ethical funds, although not a "panacea" were an improvement over other funds and that some ethical funds engaged with firms on ethical issues (Cowton, 1999; Mills, 2000; Friedman and Miles, 2001). Finally, ethical history and Church perspectives are employed in a tentative analysis of whether ethical funds are good investments ethically (Mackenzie, 1997). This preliminary analysis made it clear that some ethical funds would not be good investments in a moral sense for certain investors

Humoristiset kommunikatiiviset keinot multimodaalisessa mainonnassa Haribo Saksan Instagram-tilillä

Työn tavoitteena on selvittää mitä humoristisia kommunikatiivisia keinoja Haribo Saksa käyttää Instagram-julkaisuissaan. Työssä keskitytään erityisesti erilaisiin kielileikkeihin, jotka ilmenevät julkaisuissa 26.2.2020-12.3.2021 välisenä aikana sekä minkä teemojen pohjalta kielileikit ovat rakennettu. Apuna kielileikkien kategorisoinnissa käytetään Janichin (2013) kielileikkien luokittelua sanaleikkeihin, referenssileikkeihin sekä kontekstileikkeihin. Työssä keskitytään erilaisiin sanaleikkeihin sekä referenssileikkeihin. Sanaleikit ovat Janichin (2013) luokittelua mukaillen luokiteltu työssä sananmuodostukseksi, sanan vaihdoksi, äänteen lisäykseksi, homoifooniksi sekä kontaminaatioksi. Myös referenssileikit ovat Janichin (2013) luokittelun mukaan jaettu polyseemeihin, personifiointiin, kontekstikombinaatioihin sekä viittauksiin kuvan ja tekstin välillä. Analyysimateriaaliksi on rajattu pelkästään kuvajulkaisut, joissa ilmenee vähintään yksi kielileikki. Osa Haribon tuotteiden nimistä on rakennettu sanaleikkejä käyttäen, ja siksi myös julkaisut, joissa ilmenee pelkästään tuotteen nimi, ilman humoristista yhteyttä julkaisun kuvaan, ovat rajattu pois. Myöskään videojulkaisuja ei analysoida. Analyysimateriaali on kerätty näyttökaappauksina haribo_deutschland Instagram-käyttäjältä 24.2.2021-6.4.2021 välisenä aikana ja yhteensä analysoitavia julkaisuja on 69. Työssä keskeisessä roolissa kielileikkien lisäksi ovat Instagram, mainonta sekä multimodaalisuus. Clueleyn (2017: 3) mukaan mainokset voivat muistuttaa ulkoisesti esimerkiksi taidetta tai uutisia, joten mainoksen määrittäväksi tekijäksi sopii paremmin sen tavoite vaikuttaa ihmisiin, ja saada yleisö esimerkiksi ostamaan mainostettua tuotetta. Tämän perusteella Haribo Saksan julkaiseman Instagram-sisällön voi luokitella mainonnaksi. Stöckl et al. (2011) määrittelevät multimodaalisuuden käsitteenä kommunikatiivisille tilanteille, jotka sisältävät useita eri moodeja (esimerkiksi kieltä, kuvia tai ääntä). Tässä työssä analysoidut Haribo Saksan Instagram-julkaisut sisältävät sekä kieltä että kuvia, joten ne ovat multimodaalisia. Multimodaalisuus on tärkeä osa analysoitavien sanaleikkien ymmärtämistä, sillä analysoidut sanaleikit syntyvät juuri kuvan, sekä kuvatekstin tai kuvassa olevan tekstin yhteydestä. Työssä yhdistyy sekä laadullinen että kvantitatiivinen analyysi. Julkaisut analysoidaan ensin laadullisesti, kun määritellään mikä kielileikki ja teema on kyseessä. Sitten julkaisut analysoidaan kvantitatiivisesti, kun eritellään kuinka usein mikäkin kielileikki tai teema on ilmennyt analysoitavissa postauksissa. Analysoiduista 69 julkaisusta löytyi 20 sanaleikkiä ja 54 referenssileikkiä. Löytyneiden kielileikkien suurempi määrä kuin analysoitavien postausten määrä selittyy sillä, että yksi julkaisu voi sisältää useamman kielileikin. Sanaleikeistä yleisin oli sananmuodostus, joka löytyi yhdeksästä julkaisusta. Referenssileikeistä suurimman ryhmän muodosti kontekstikombinaatiot, joita löytyi 44. Teemat kielileikkien taustalla on jaettu makeisen ulkonäköön, nimeen, väriin ja makuun. Löytyi myös teemoja, jotka eivät sovi tähän jaotteluun ja ne muodostavat oman ryhmänsä. Yleisin teema, jonka pohjalta analysoidut sanaleikit sekä referenssileikit oli rakennettu, oli makeisen ulkonäkö. Tämä selittyy osin sillä, että mikäli kielileikin teema olisi voinut olla sekä ulkonäkö että esimerkiksi maku, on ensisijaisena pidetty ulkonäköä

Putting our money where their mouth is: alignment of charitable aims with charity investments - tensions in policy and practice

Given the values-driven nature of the mission of most charities, it might be expected that investment behaviour would be similarly values-driven. This paper documents the ethical investment policies and practices of the largest UK charities and explores how these are aligned with the charitable aims, drawing upon accountability, behavioural and managerial perspectives as theoretical lenses. The study employs two distinct research methods: responses to a postal questionnaire and follow-up semi-structured interviews with selected charities. The evidence indicates that a significant minority of large charities do not have a written ethical investment policy. Charities with larger investments, fundraising charities and religious charities were more likely to have a written ethical policy. We suggest that there is a pressing need for improved alignment between charities' aims and their investment practices and better monitoring of investment policies

The Market Performance of Socially Responsible Investment during Periods of the Economic Cycle - Illustrated Using the Case of FTSE

The debate about socially responsible investment (SRI) portfolio performance compared with its non-SRI counterparts remains inconclusive. This paper contributes to the debate by adding a new approach, examining the issue of a full economic circle through economic boom, recession and recovery. We compare stock performance of two value-weighted investment portfolios: FTSE4Good (SRI portfolios) and FTSE 350 (conventional portfolios) from 2004 to 2011 including 2007 to 2009 financial crash. The results indicate the SRI portfolio performed better and recovered its value quicker in post-crisis than the non-SRI portfolio, indicating that SRI portfolios are more resilient to economic turmoil and market shocks

Selecting socially responsible portfolios: A fuzzy multicriteria approach

[EN] We propose a multi-objective approach for portfolio selection, which allows investors to consider not only return and downside risk criteria but also to include environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores in the investment decision-making process. Owing to the uncertain environment of portfolio selection, the return and ESG score of each asset are considered as independent L-R power fuzzy variables. To make the model more realistic, we take budget, floor ceiling and cardinality constraints into account. In order to select the optimal portfolio along the efficient frontier, we apply the Sortino ratio in a credibilistic environment. The subsequent empirical application uses a data set from Bloomberg's ESG Data in combination with US Dow Jones Industrial Average data. The experimental results show that the proposed model offers promising results for socially responsible investors seeking ethical and sustainability goals beyond the return-risk trade-off and its ability to beat the benchmarkGarcía García, F.; Gonzalez-Bueno, J.; Oliver-Muncharaz, J.; Riley, N. (2019). Selecting socially responsible portfolios: A fuzzy multicriteria approach. Sustainability. 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092496S119Ballestero, E., Pérez-Gladish, B., & Garcia-Bernabeu, A. (2014). The Ethical Financial Question and the MCDM Framework. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, 3-22. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11836-9_1Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2002). Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 138(2), 229-246. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(01)00243-0ARRIBAS, I., GARCÍA, F., GUIJARRO, F., OLIVER, J., & TAMOŠIŪNIENĖ, R. (2016). MASS APPRAISAL OF RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE USING MULTILEVEL MODELLING. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 20(1), 77-87. doi:10.3846/1648715x.2015.1134702García, F., Guijarro, F., Oliver, J., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2018). HYBRID FUZZY NEURAL NETWORK TO PREDICT PRICE DIRECTION IN THE GERMAN DAX-30 INDEX. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(6), 2161-2178. doi:10.3846/tede.2018.6394Xidonas, P., Doukas, H., Mavrotas, G., & Pechak, O. (2015). Environmental corporate responsibility for investments evaluation: an alternative multi-objective programming model. Annals of Operations Research, 247(2), 395-413. doi:10.1007/s10479-015-1820-xMiralles-Quirós, M. del M., & Miralles-Quirós, J. L. (2015). Improving Diversification Opportunities for Socially Responsible Investors. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(2), 339-351. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2691-4JERÓNIMO SILVESTRE, W., ANTUNES, P., & LEAL FILHO, W. (2016). THE CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY TYPOLOGY: ANALYSING SUSTAINABILITY DRIVERS AND FOSTERING SUSTAINABILITY AT ENTERPRISES. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), 513-533. doi:10.3846/20294913.2016.1213199Rahman, S., Lee, C.-F., & Xiao, Y. (2016). The investment performance, attributes, and investment behavior of ethical equity mutual funds in the US: an empirical investigation. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 49(1), 91-116. doi:10.1007/s11156-016-0581-1Bouslah, K., Kryzanowski, L., & M’Zali, B. (2013). The impact of the dimensions of social performance on firm risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(4), 1258-1273. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.12.004Petrillo, A., De Felice, F., García-Melón, M., & Pérez-Gladish, B. (2016). Investing in socially responsible mutual funds: Proposal of non-financial ranking in Italian market. Research in International Business and Finance, 37, 541-555. doi:10.1016/j.ribaf.2016.01.027Fowler, S. J., & Hope, C. (2007). A Critical Review of Sustainable Business Indices and their Impact. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(3), 243-252. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9590-2Jankalová, M., & Jankal, R. (2017). The assessment of corporate social responsibility: approaches analysis. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(4), 441-459. doi:10.9770/jesi.2017.4.4(4)Smaliukienė, R., & Monni, S. (2019). A step-by-step approach to social marketing in energy transition. Insights into Regional Development, 1(1), 19-32. doi:10.9770/ird.2019.1.1(2)Anagnostopoulos, T., Skouloudis, A., Khan, N., & Evangelinos, K. (2018). Incorporating Sustainability Considerations into Lending Decisions and the Management of Bad Loans: Evidence from Greece. Sustainability, 10(12), 4728. doi:10.3390/su10124728Charlo, M., Moya, I., & Muñoz, A. (2017). Financial Performance of Socially Responsible Firms: The Short- and Long-Term Impact. Sustainability, 9(9), 1622. doi:10.3390/su9091622De Colle, S., & York, J. G. (2008). Why Wine is not Glue? The Unresolved Problem of Negative Screening in Socially Responsible Investing. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(S1), 83-95. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9949-zDerwall, J., & Koedijk, K. (2009). Socially Responsible Fixed-Income Funds. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 36(1-2), 210-229. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5957.2008.02119.xWu, J., Lodorfos, G., Dean, A., & Gioulmpaxiotis, G. (2015). The Market Performance of Socially Responsible Investment during Periods of the Economic Cycle - Illustrated Using the Case of FTSE. Managerial and Decision Economics, 38(2), 238-251. doi:10.1002/mde.2772Chang, C. E., & Doug Witte, H. (2010). Performance Evaluation of U.S. Socially Responsible Mutual Funds: Revisiting Doing Good and Doing Well. American Journal of Business, 25(1), 9-24. doi:10.1108/19355181201000001Cortez, M. C., Silva, F., & Areal, N. (2008). The Performance of European Socially Responsible Funds. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(4), 573-588. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9959-xInvesting in Socially Responsible Mutual Fundshttps://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1444&context=fnce_papersJones, S., van der Laan, S., Frost, G., & Loftus, J. (2007). The Investment Performance of Socially Responsible Investment Funds in Australia. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(2), 181-203. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9412-6Renneboog, L., Ter Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2008). Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(9), 1723-1742. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.12.039Bauer, R., Koedijk, K., & Otten, R. (2005). International evidence on ethical mutual fund performance and investment style. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(7), 1751-1767. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2004.06.035Brzeszczyński, J., & McIntosh, G. (2013). Performance of Portfolios Composed of British SRI Stocks. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), 335-362. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1541-xGoldreyer, E. F., & Diltz, J. D. (1999). The performance of socially responsible mutual funds: incorporating sociopolitical information in portfolio selection. Managerial Finance, 25(1), 23-36. doi:10.1108/03074359910765830Hamilton, S., Jo, H., & Statman, M. (1993). Doing Well While Doing Good? The Investment Performance of Socially Responsible Mutual Funds. Financial Analysts Journal, 49(6), 62-66. doi:10.2469/faj.v49.n6.62Revelli, C., & Viviani, J.-L. (2014). Financial performance of socially responsible investing (SRI): what have we learned? A meta-analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(2), 158-185. doi:10.1111/beer.12076McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate Social Responsibility: a Theory of the Firm Perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011987El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. Y., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital? Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.02.007Attig, N., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Suh, J. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility and Credit Ratings. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 679-694. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1714-2Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1-23. doi:10.1002/smj.2131Hallerbach, W. (2004). A framework for managing a portfolio of socially responsible investments. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 517-529. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00172-3Steuer, R. E., Qi, Y., & Hirschberger, M. (2006). Suitable-portfolio investors, nondominated frontier sensitivity, and the effect of multiple objectives on standard portfolio selection. Annals of Operations Research, 152(1), 297-317. doi:10.1007/s10479-006-0137-1Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., & Cañal-Fernández, V. (2012). A fuzzy multi-objective approach for sustainable investments. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(12), 10904-10915. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.03.034Calvo, C., Ivorra, C., & Liern, V. (2014). Fuzzy portfolio selection with non-financial goals: exploring the efficient frontier. Annals of Operations Research, 245(1-2), 31-46. doi:10.1007/s10479-014-1561-2Li, Z. F., Minor, D., Wang, J., & Yu, C. (2018). A Learning Curve of the Market: Chasing Alpha of Socially Responsible Firms. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3224796Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., Cañal-Fernández, V., & Obam-Eyang, P. N. (2018). Multi-criteria analysis of the GRI sustainability reports: an application to Socially Responsible Investment. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 69(10), 1576-1598. doi:10.1057/s41274-017-0229-0Gasser, S. M., Rammerstorfer, M., & Weinmayer, K. (2017). Markowitz revisited: Social portfolio engineering. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(3), 1181-1190. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.043Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-xGupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., & Saxena, A. (2013). Hybrid optimization models of portfolio selection involving financial and ethical considerations. Knowledge-Based Systems, 37, 318-337. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2012.08.014Baoding Liu, & Yian-Kui Liu. (2002). Expected value of fuzzy variable and fuzzy expected value models. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10(4), 445-450. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2002.800692Barak, S., Abessi, M., & Modarres, M. (2013). Fuzzy turnover rate chance constraints portfolio model. European Journal of Operational Research, 228(1), 141-147. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.01.036Huang, X. (2006). Fuzzy chance-constrained portfolio selection. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 177(2), 500-507. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2005.11.027Vercher, E., & Bermúdez, J. D. (2015). Portfolio optimization using a credibility mean-absolute semi-deviation model. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(20), 7121-7131. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.05.020Gupta, P., Mittal, G., & Mehlawat, M. K. (2013). Expected value multiobjective portfolio rebalancing model with fuzzy parameters. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 52(2), 190-203. doi:10.1016/j.insmatheco.2012.12.002Mohebbi, N., & Najafi, A. A. (2018). Credibilistic multi-period portfolio optimization based on scenario tree. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 492, 1302-1316. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2017.11.058Jalota, H., Thakur, M., & Mittal, G. (2017). Modelling and constructing membership function for uncertain portfolio parameters: A credibilistic framework. Expert Systems with Applications, 71, 40-56. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.014García, F., González-Bueno, J., Oliver, J., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2019). A CREDIBILISTIC MEAN-SEMIVARIANCE-PER PORTFOLIO SELECTION MODEL FOR LATIN AMERICA. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(2), 225-243. doi:10.3846/jbem.2019.8317Markowitz, H., Todd, P., Xu, G., & Yamane, Y. (1993). Computation of mean-semivariance efficient sets by the Critical Line Algorithm. Annals of Operations Research, 45(1), 307-317. doi:10.1007/bf02282055Sortino, F. A., & van der Meer, R. (1991). Downside risk. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 17(4), 27-31. doi:10.3905/jpm.1991.409343Vercher, E., & Bermúdez, J. D. (2012). Fuzzy Portfolio Selection Models: A Numerical Study. Financial Decision Making Using Computational Intelligence, 253-280. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3773-4_10Vercher, E., & Bermudez, J. D. (2013). A Possibilistic Mean-Downside Risk-Skewness Model for Efficient Portfolio Selection. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 21(3), 585-595. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2012.2227487Liagkouras, K., & Metaxiotis, K. (2015). Efficient Portfolio Construction with the Use of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Best Practices and Performance Metrics. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 14(03), 535-564. doi:10.1142/s0219622015300013Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182-197. doi:10.1109/4235.996017Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Inuiguchi, M., & Chandra, S. (2014). Portfolio Optimization with Interval Coefficients. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 33-59. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-54652-5_2Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Business, 39(S1), 119. doi:10.1086/29484

Socially responsible investing in the global market : the performance of US and European funds

This paper investigates the style and performance of US and European global socially responsible funds. Several specifications of the return generating process are applied as well as their corresponding conditional versions. Most European global socially responsible funds do not show significant performance differences in relation to both conventional benchmarks and socially responsible benchmarks. US funds and Austrian funds show evidence of underperformance. By applying conditional models, we find evidence of time-varying betas, but not of time-varying alphas. With respect to investment style, we find evidence that socially responsible funds are strongly exposed to small cap and growth stocks. While these results are consistent with previous studies, they uncover some misclassification issues in these funds. Finally, we also document a significant home bias for global socially responsible funds.Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT

Does it pay to be ethical? Evidence from the FTSE4Good

The empirical mean-variance evidence comparing the performance of socially responsible investments (SRI) and conventional investments suggests that there is no significant difference between the two. This paper re-examines the problem in the context of Marginal Conditional Stochastic Dominance (MCSD), which can accommodate any return distribution or concave utility function. Our results provide strong evidence that there is a financial price to be paid for socially responsible investing. Indices composed of socially responsible firms are MCSD dominated by trademarked indices composed of conventional firms as well as by indices carefully matched by size and industry with the firms in the SRI indices. Zero cost portfolios created by shorting the SRI index and using the proceeds to invest in the conventional index generate higher average returns, lower variance and higher skewness than either of the two indices standing alone. They also MCSD dominate the SRI and conventional indices standing alone

Dominant stakeholders, activity and accountability discharge in the CSO Sector

Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) comprise a diverse range of associations, including NGOs, community groups, political parties and social networks. Nevertheless, despite heterogeneity, regulators, funders and donors often treat CSOs as homogeneous when demanding accountability. This paper highlights differences in to whom CSOs across different categories (or types) perceive themselves to be accountable, what for, and the different practices they undertake to discharge accountability. It calls for stakeholders to acknowledge diversity in accountability across different CSO types. This survey-based research finds CSOs weight upwards and downwards stakeholders equally, and undertake voluminous reporting. They would benefit from negotiating multiple-use mechanisms, especially with dominant stakeholders. In combining stakeholder and accountability theory, the research highlights specific CSO types needing further study

The effects of corporate and country sustainability characteristics on the cost of debt: an international investigation

We investigate the relationship between corporate and country sustainability on the cost of bank loans. We look into 470 loan agreements signed between 2005 and 2012 with borrowers based in 28 different countries across the world and operating in all major industries. Our principal findings reveal that country sustainability, relating to both social and environmental frameworks, has a statistically and economically impactful effect on direct financing of economic activity. An increase of one unit in a country's sustainability score is associated with an average decrease in the cost of debt by 64 basis points. Our international analysis shows that the environmental dimension of a country's institutional framework is approximately twice as impactful as the social dimension, when it comes to determining the cost of corporate loans. On the other hand, we find no conclusive evidence that firm-level sustainability influences the interest rates charged to borrowing firms by banks. Our main findings survive a battery of robustness tests and additional analyses concerning subsamples, alternative sustainability metrics and the effects of financial crisis

Accountability and not-for-profit organisations: implications for developing international financial reporting standards

This paper provides empirical evidence which informs contemporary debates on developing international financial reporting standards for not-for-profit organisations (NPOs) (CCAB, 2013a,b; IFRS Foundation, 2015). Drawing on a global survey with respondents showing experience of NPO reporting in 179 countries, we explore: practice and beliefs about NPO financial reporting internationally; perceptions of accountability between NPOs and stakeholders; and implications for developing international financial reporting standards. Interpreting our research in the context of accountability, we find considerable support for developing international financial reporting standards for NPOs, recognising broad stewardship accountability to all stakeholders as important, but prioritising accountability upwards to external funders and regulators